Firing incompetent and unprofessional PRL editors?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Xela
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around frustrations with journal rejections, particularly from Physical Review Letters (PRL). Participants express concerns about the perceived incompetence and unprofessionalism of editors, especially regarding the increasing trend of rejections without peer review. There is a sentiment that editors, who are often not part of the academic community, wield excessive power without accountability. Some suggest that a feedback mechanism for editors could help address these issues, while others emphasize that rejections often stem from the paper not meeting the journal's standards rather than personal bias. The conversation touches on the importance of presenting work effectively to appeal to editors and the notion that many rejections are based on the perceived significance of the research rather than its quality. Participants also caution against naming specific editors publicly, advocating for a more constructive approach to addressing grievances. Overall, the thread highlights the complex dynamics of academic publishing, the subjective nature of editorial decisions, and the need for authors to adapt their submissions to meet journal expectations.
Xela
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
I guess like many others here, I have several papers rejected from various journals, and especially from PRL. Rejections are always unpleasant, and you get used to them. But sometimes it seems especially unfair and the editor seems completely incompetent and unprofessional. Unlike with incompetent referees, there is really no way to fight back – the editor has a status of a Pharaoh. The situation is getting very asymmetric now that editors started rejecting a large number of papers without review. They are not part of the community, and they are never on the other side of the rejection like referees.

I wonder if among all rejections you felt that one specific editor was particularly incompetent and unprofessional. And if many people name the same unprofessional editor, we can collectively get rid of that editor. I’m curious to hear what others think.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Read Martin Eden by Jack London.
 
  • Like
Likes hutchphd
Xela said:
But sometimes it seems especially unfair and the editor seems completely incompetent and unprofessional.

How? What was unfair? Specifics?

Unlike with incompetent referees, there is really no way to fight back – the editor has a status of a Pharaoh. The situation is getting very asymmetric now that editors started rejecting a large number of papers without review.

There's only a finite number of reviewers available. There's a lot of submissions. Maybe they should offer the rejected papers a chance to get reviewer comments for a fee. The fee wouldn't be small. I'd charge $500 at least for a detailed paper review and the time it takes. And no guarantee you'll still not be rejected for publication. An editor serves as a screen.
They are not part of the community, and they are never on the other side of the rejection like referees.

Why not? Lot of editors are active researchers. Don't know about PRL in specific.

I wonder if among all rejections you felt that one specific editor was particularly incompetent and unprofessional. And if many people name the same unprofessional editor, we can collectively get rid of that editor. I’m curious to hear what others think.

I think your complaint is unspecific. What exactly was unprofessional? Just rejecting a paper cannot be.
 
I don't think I've come across an unprofessional editor. But, when your paper gets rejected by the editor (before being sent out for review), it means that the paper does not meet the conditions for publication in the journal. This is not a factual assessment, but usually format or, for PRL, a lack of importance beyond your specific subfield. You are given the chance to make changes to your manuscript and resubmit.

This forum is not the place for a witchhunt, so please don't be naming editors you think should be fired for not accepting your paper.
 
  • Like
Likes hutchphd
I think the editors of a reputed journal like PRL know their jobs and I trust them.
 
rollingstein said:
How? What was unfair? Specifics?

Consistently being unfair to authors for political reasons


rollingstein said:
I think your complaint is unspecific. What exactly was unprofessional? Just rejecting a paper cannot be.

Of course, many rejections are unpleasant, but reasonable.
 
cristo said:
I don't think I've come across an unprofessional editor. But, when your paper gets rejected by the editor (before being sent out for review), it means that the paper does not meet the conditions for publication in the journal. This is not a factual assessment, but usually format or, for PRL, a lack of importance beyond your specific subfield. You are given the chance to make changes to your manuscript and resubmit.

Ideally that would be the case, but the editors like all of us are human. Humans make mistakes, sometimes have conflict of interest etc. Other players in the game have a checking mechanism - editors don't. This is all I'm saying.

cristo said:
This forum is not the place for a witchhunt, so please don't be naming editors you think should be fired for not accepting your paper.

How is this a witchhunt? An editor is a job done by humans. There should be a feedback mechanism checking the quality of the performance. You can't complain personally, because of retaliations. The only possible action is to get a collective complaint if the editor is really unfair to many. I just wanted to see if that was the case indeed.
 
Kholdstare said:
I think the editors of a reputed journal like PRL know their jobs and I trust them.

And presidents of reputed countries know their jobs, so they should be trusted and keep ruling forever?
 
Xela said:
I wonder if among all rejections you felt that one specific editor was particularly incompetent and unprofessional. And if many people name the same unprofessional editor, we can collectively get rid of that editor.
I'm in. You go first.
 
  • #10
I don't know if you've met any of the editors of PRL, or the Physical Review journals for that matter. I suggest you go talk to them. They are often around at the APS March/April meetings.

These people are NOT the imbeciles that you think. They take feedback seriously, and they definitely keep track of the areas that they specialize in. I've attended many seminars at Brookhaven where PR editors also present (their offices are within easy driving distance to the lab).

Secondly, this is only ONE side of the story. If you had "several papers" rejected, then how about examining if it is also possible that the caliber of the work might be the issue! PRL has recently tightened the quality of papers that it will accept. It won't accept something just because it is new. It must also have a larger impact.

BTW, the difficulty of getting through the editors at PRL is NOTHING when compared to Nature or Science.

Zz.
 
  • #11
ZapperZ said:
I don't know if you've met any of the editors of PRL, or the Physical Review journals for that matter. I suggest you go talk to them. They are often around at the APS March/April meetings.

Well, I could just email them if that was the issue. My point is that there is no external checking mechanism. Just like you wouldn't expect a police department to be objective to itself. I'd want an external body for that.

ZapperZ said:
These people are NOT the imbeciles that you think.

I never implied they were. The smartest people make mistakes, they can be sloppy, biased etc.

ZapperZ said:
Secondly, this is only ONE side of the story. If you had "several papers" rejected, then how about examining if it is also possible that the caliber of the work might be the issue! PRL has recently tightened the quality of papers that it will accept. It won't accept something just because it is new. It must also have a larger impact.

I have more PRL papers published than rejected. But my case is not important, I'm talking about a general principle - there is no control on what editors do.

ZapperZ said:
BTW, the difficulty of getting through the editors at PRL is NOTHING when compared to Nature or Science.

Somehow I'm used to thinking of Nature and Science as flashy magazines for the sake of flashiness, and of PRL as a real scientific journal. But you're right, the same applies to Nature and Science.
 
  • #12
P.S.: Again, I want to emphasize that I mean ONE specific editor that seems unfair for political reasons. The rest seem reasonably fair to me.
 
  • #13
Xela said:
P.S.: Again, I want to emphasize that I mean ONE specific editor that seems unfair for political reasons. The rest seem reasonably fair to me.

Go and talk to him.
 
  • #14
Xela said:
P.S.: Again, I want to emphasize that I mean ONE specific editor that seems unfair for political reasons. The rest seem reasonably fair to me.

Complain to the Editor in Chief or Editorial Director then.
 
  • #15
Xela said:
Somehow I'm used to thinking of Nature and Science as flashy magazines for the sake of flashiness, and of PRL as a real scientific journal.

What you are used to thinking is wrong then.
 
  • #16
Why do you think that your papers are being rejected for political reasons?
 
  • #17
Ryan_m_b said:
Why do you think that your papers are being rejected for political reasons?

Because, a number of authors I talked to have the same feeling. I was hoping to get a bigger statistical sample here.
 
  • #18
Perhaps the fact that you don't toot your own horn as to your credibility leaves members wondering if you are in fact credible. But, had you claimed to be credible, people would then think you weren't. It's a tough situation. You're an unknown, so it's hard to judge.

Perhaps we should assume the OP is a well known and published individual and go from there.
 
  • #19
Evo said:
Perhaps the fact that you don't toot your own horn as to your credibility leaves members wondering if you are in fact credible. But, had you claimed to be credible, people would then think you weren't. It's a tough situation. You're an unknown, so it's hard to judge.

Perhaps we should assume the OP is a well known and published individual and go from there.

It would be helpful to know the OP's field of research, at least - then we can better judge how politically incendiary it is.
 
  • #20
Xela said:
My point is that there is no external checking mechanism.

Sure there is. The Associate Editors report to Editors. The Editors report to an APS Editor in Chief and there is oversight by an external Editorial Board. The next level of oversight is the American Physical Society's Publications Oversight Committee, and above that is the APS Presidency Line, who are elected by the APS membership.
 
  • #21
Xela said:
P.S.: Again, I want to emphasize that I mean ONE specific editor that seems unfair for political reasons. The rest seem reasonably fair to me.

What do you mean by political reasons? Is it like, I'm a true-blue and you're a known red, so I'm going to block this paper. Or is it more like, the editor is in the same field as you and your results contradict his/hers...or something else?
 
  • #22
This is one of those issues where simply posting about it invokes a reaction from readers that there must be a sour grapes element. Your paper got rejected, and now you feel there was a political element to it - okay, but without any evidence surely you can see how something like this would be hard to swallow.

One simple solution is to aim to publish your work in a different journal if you don't feel you're being treated fairly.

Vote with your feet.

If there really is an issue, people will start to notice that good papers are going elsewhere, or that a specific topic isn't getting attention.
 
  • #23
Evo said:
Perhaps the fact that you don't toot your own horn as to your credibility leaves members wondering if you are in fact credible. But, had you claimed to be credible, people would then think you weren't. It's a tough situation. You're an unknown, so it's hard to judge.


The reason members are skeptical is a lack of specificity. Without naming editors why not first tell us your field? Post an abstract? Post the paper itself on arxiv perhaps? Or at least a condensation of your idea in the paper? Experiments or Theory?

"It's political rejection" is just too darn vague.

Perhaps we should assume the OP is a well known and published individual and go from there.

Assuming he's a crank submitting "Cold Fusion" papers is the other extreme of an assumption. How do we know which one it is?
 
  • #24
rollingstein said:
Assuming he's a crank submitting "Cold Fusion" papers is the other extreme of an assumption. How do we know which one it is?
Assume best case? My take is that he can't give specifics without exposing his identity, and is just asking if others have encountered any (seemingly) unusual bias. Of course, others would probably be in the same situation, not wanting to give information that might reveal their true identity.
 
  • #25
Evo said:
Assume best case? My take is that he can't give specifics without exposing his identity, and is just asking if others have encountered any (seemingly) unusual bias. Of course, others would probably be in the same situation, not wanting to give information that might reveal their true identity.

He can't have it both ways. He started off encouraging public naming of editors. Yet he wants to remain anonymous.

Not fair.
 
  • #26
I agree with many of the above sentiments, but especially Zapperz's.

The editors of all the major journals are certainly members of the community. In fact, even most journals of a "lower tier" compared to PR and PRL have editors that are active, successful researchers and faculty members. Go to conferences and you will meet some. They know what they are doing and are not incompetent.

As for unprofessional, I can't comment. I'm know from personal experience that editors and reviewers can be nasty at times. Scientists are human and not perfect. However, you have to remember that scientific journals are not a public utility. They have a right to reject a decent paper reporting a decent result if they don't think their reader base will find it interesting. Remember many great writers get stories rejected from the New Yorker every day. This is the nature of trying to publish anything.

If you are having issues getting a paper published even if you are sure the science is sound perhaps you need to work on your 'sell.' Work on tweaking your introduction and making it clear why your work is important and exciting to the journal and it's readers. I've noticed a lot of scientists have problems with this. Many scientists carry around this misconception that a good experiment or good result will sell itself, but this is not necessarily true. Being able to write a good introduction that gets your readers excited and makes the context of your work clear is an important skill to develop in any science.
 
  • #27
I remember one time that our submission to Nature got rejected by the Editor without even getting through to the referees. We received a curt reply from the Nature Editor and the reason why. We disagreed, of course, and we certainly had a recourse to send a rebuttal, but instead, we decided to send it over to PRL. It got accepted within 3 months and as of late last year, became my most highly-cited paper.

For people in this predicament, I would like to point to you an wonderful article written by the late Dan Koshland "Crazy But Correct" (D.E. Koshland, Jr., Nature v.432, p.447 (2004)). If you think YOU have problems with editors and referees, you should read HIS story. And that is why, coming from him, these words mean a lot:

Koshland said:
The trouble is that journals can easily become too conservative, because editors find it easier to reject the unusual than to take a chance on the unthinkable... The existence of multiple journals provides the final safeguard against too much conservatism and is the ultimate reason that science is more receptive to non-conformity than any other segment of our society

And let's not forget that no less of a person than Einstein himself had issues with journals, and refereeing. And he http://physicstoday.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_58/iss_9/43_1.shtml?bypassSSO=1 had he paid attention to his referee reports.

The irony, of course, is that Einstein could have found that escape route months earlier, simply by reading the referee's report that he had dismissed so hastily. The referee had also observed that casting the Einstein–Rosen metric (as we now call this solution of the Einstein equations) in cylindrical coordinates removes the apparent difficulty.

Many of us in this field, at one point or another, have faced this rejection. I have dealt with the Physical Review a lot, both as an author and as a referee. In all of my dealings, I have never had the impression of something being done out of a "political" reason. Certainly, having met some of the editors/associate editors, that thought doesn't even enter my mind!

So enter that as one of your statistical sample.

Zz.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top